New Case Law Derails Sentencing Of Nevada County Man In Federal Weapons Case
BY Herschel Smith5 years, 1 month ago
The ripples of this case are just beginning.
A South County man indicted by a federal grand jury in 2015 on weapons and marijuana charges was set to be sentenced today after taking a plea agreement. But Craig Mason’s sentencing has been postponed until mid-November, because a different case currently being litigated could invalidate the weapons charge.
Mason pleaded guilty in March to unlawfully manufacturing and dealing in firearms and was facing as much as five years in prison and a $250,000 fine, according to court documents. At the center of the charge was an allegation that Mason manufactured and sold the parts necessary to assemble a firearm to a person he believed to be a felon.
But in a memo sent last week to U.S. District Court Judge Kimberly J. Mueller, Mason’s attorney cited developments in a case involving similar allegations — United States v. Roh. Like Mason, Roh was indicted for manufacturing and dealing firearms — hundreds of AR-15-type lower receivers, completed pistols, and completed rifles, according to court records.
At issue is whether “lower receivers” can be considered firearms. Federal prosecutors have, as in Mason’s case, considered the answer to be “yes.” Mason operated a workshop on his Rosewood Road property just outside Lake of the Pines, where he allegedly converted AR-15-style blanks into lower receivers. A “blank” is a metal casting that can be converted to allow the firing a of a projectile. Once converted, it is considered a firearm by statute, even if there is no barrel, handle, or trigger, and it is subject to regulation.
In Joseph Roh’s case, a judge ruled “the evidence at trial was uncontroverted that a finished AR-15 receiver does not contain a bolt or breech block and is not threaded to receive the barrel. … The plain conclusion is that the finished receiver is not a firearm.” The ruling continued, “Roh did not violate the law by manufacturing receivers. The Court further finds that with respect to manufacturing receivers, the statute and regulation are unconstitutionally vague.”
Following the tentative order, the prosecution and defense agreed to a deal in which Roh would plead guilty to the charge against him, but would be allowed to withdraw that plea if he stayed out of trouble for a year. Prosecutors would then dismiss the case. If Roh abides by the deal, he will have no criminal conviction and serve no time behind bars. Roh’s sentencing has been set for July of next year.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives had been investigating the unlawful sale and manufacturing of firearms by Sacramento dealer LCG AR Parts and Custom Accessories. A confidential informant reportedly purchased blanks from LCG in 2013, asked to have them illegally converted and was directed to Mason. According to court records, Mason manufactured two AR-15-style lower receivers for the confidential informant, despite being told the man had been to prison and was prohibited from possessing a firearm.
During execution of a federal search warrant on Mason’s property in October 2013, law enforcement officers reportedly found multiple AR blanks and lower receivers, as well as several AR-15 rifles and a pistol built with a lower receiver that originally had been blanks, and three jigs used to machine blanks into lower receivers.
I wonder how far this will go? Will this case be dropped as well, or at least, recast into something else? Is the ATF’s spider web of judgments, regulations and letters of interpretation beginning to unravel, or will they just judge-shop until they find a ruling they like?
On October 22, 2019 at 2:46 am, Dan said:
While it’s not possible to predict what bizarre antics that BATFEces will come up with to continue their war (engaged in at the behest of politicians) against guns in general and the AR15 specifically you can count on them to find SOME WAY to keep infringing on our rights. Since ALL of the 20,000 plus laws, rules and regulations already extant are unconstitutional the logical presumption is they aren’t going to let a minor
detail like a single ruling from ONE judge interfere with their agenda.
On October 22, 2019 at 4:18 am, Len Savage said:
I’m sure these events have nothing to do with the Chief of FTB now moving to the export branch….
Announced yesterday in the first FFL newsletter published in two years.
My only question is did he see this coming and duck or did they give Max the boot?
Inquiring minds want to know???
On October 22, 2019 at 9:19 am, DDS said:
IIRC, there was a similar “Charlie Foxtrot” some years back concerning variants of the FN FAL. Essentially you can find legally imported examples with the serial number on the upper and other legally imported examples with the serial number on the lower. There’s even been speculation as to what lines you would cross if you mixed and matched the receiver halves ending up with one formerly legal rifle with no serial number and another with two. Given BATFE’s sense of humor I’ll leave that experiment to others.
On October 22, 2019 at 9:31 am, Mark Matis said:
Surely you know the answer to your last question.
On October 22, 2019 at 9:16 pm, Don said:
I wonder if Trump’s executive order on 10/9/19 requires the ATF to publish all the letters, guidance documents, etc., that it uses to imprison gun owners: “Within 120 days of the date on which the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issues an implementing memorandum under section 6 of this order, each agency or agency component, as appropriate, shall establish or maintain on its website a single, searchable, indexed database that contains or links to all guidance documents in effect from such agency or component.” https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-promoting-rule-law-improved-agency-guidance-documents/
On October 23, 2019 at 1:37 pm, Geoff said:
The ATF will just rewrite the LAW like they did to declare a bump stock a machine gun.
On October 24, 2019 at 3:08 pm, William said:
I’m betting that the ATF will publish guidance stating that BOTH the AR upper and lower are receivers and that henceforth, both will require serial numbers to be transferred (legacy uppers will be treated like homemade firearms), you’ll need to purchase new uppers through a FFL.